The latest BNZ and Real Estate Institute residential market survey found 9 per cent of house sales were to people offshore.

Of those offshore buyers, 18 per cent were from Britain, 15 per cent from China and 14 per cent from Australia.

Will we hear the parties of the left going on about banning Brits from buying property in New Zealand?

BNZ’s chief economist Tony Alexander said real estate agents reported that at least 69 per cent of British buyers planned to move to New Zealand, while 37 per cent of Chinese buyers and 51 per cent of Australian buyers intended to.

“Taken all up that means at most 5.6 per cent (but perhaps as low as 4 per cent) of all dwelling sales are to people offshore not planning to shift to New Zealand.”

So between 94% and 96% of sales are to people residing in NZ or intending to reside here. How disgraceful that some politicians have tried to blame house prices on the 4%.

“The sprawling anecdotes regarding Auckland properties being snapped up by Chinese buyers are not supported by the evidence,” Alexander said.

While most overseas buyers in Auckland came from China (19 per cent – compared with 18 per cent from Britain), sales of property in our biggest city to Chinese buyers comprised just 2.1 per cent of total sales there.

And just 1.2 per cent of house sales in Auckland were to Chinese buyers not intending to move here.

1.2%. Remember that number the next time the xenophobes try to blame them.

Related posts:

This entry was posted on Friday, March 15th, 2013 at 7:00 am and is filed under NZ Politics.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.

27 Responses to “Not the fault of Chinese buyers”

I wonder how these xenophobes would feel if they watched their own house soar past the expected price at auction only to find out that the couple who paid $83,000 more than they had dared dream their house was worth were Asian?

I’m wondering what percentage of house sales are from foreigners selling. If it’s in that 4-5.6% band you’ve identified DPF then it could be there is even no net increase in foreign ownership at all. If it’s higher then foreigners could be having downward pressure on house prices.

Also relevant to this is how many new houses are built each year. If new houses make up more than 5.6% of house sales then new house supply would outstrip demand from foreign owners.

Both of these aspects only go to reducing the impact of foreign investors, so 4-5.6% is effectively worst case scenario.

The whole “unaffordable housing” thing is becoming a bit tiresome. The sooks that you see reported in the paper all can’t seem to buy their three bed home with a big section for kids to come in the suburb they want. No shit Sherlock! Remuera, Epsom, Parnell, Ponsonby, even Mt Eden, Grey Lynn are out of their reach because (a) they don’t want to take on big debt and (b) they want to retain their lifestyles. Oh, thats right, they want to have their cake and eat it as well. Something for nothing as always. And its always someone elses fault, could never be theirs.

If its not the Chinese, its the baby boomers. Look inwards you sooks, bite the bullet and get on with it, just like everyone since time immemorial has done, and stop whining like babies.

David
Calling people xenophobes in this day and age? I guess just too much time spent in Wellington. Calling people names and blanket labeling them when they attempt to have a legitimate discussion is classic socialism straight out of the 1930s. I thought you were a Nat ?

Joanna
Might be a good thing to look back at the evidence coming from the left + Winston that has resulted in the xenophobia retort. I have looked through the thesaurus and other tomes and can’t find a better description for this behaviour.
Perhaps you can help me find a more appropriate descriptive word?

My goodness how statistics can be abused
Indeed, it may be the 94-95% pecent of people who currently live in NZ or intend to live here, but those who may have migrated here in their hoards in the last 5 years ( and may not have actaully bought a house yet) who are buying up now ! In my view a good percentage of total buyups may well be attributed to these “Later arrivals” – without them, there may well be no shortage

Joanna
We all use words as weapons.You seem to be ok at the dark art of words. They are slightly less damaging than swords and guns.
As for the interpretation of my comments that I am suggesting that certain topics should not be discussed or expressed – not my intention.
Express and discuss away – or not, as you desire

It’s not a very good survey, based as it is on the voluntary responses of REINZ email list members:

The BNZ-REINZ Market Survey is run (usually) on the first Tuesday of the month after the first Thursday. In the email sent to REINZ member email addresses respondents are asked to click on a URL which takes them to a survey site. Respondents are asked if they feel various measures of real estate market activity are increasing or decreasing and to identify various factors in play influencing buyer and vendor behaviour

Basically it’s on the level of a Stuff poll, only with lower participation. Anyway if you’re a non-resident buyer, what are you going to say when asked if you’re planning to move to NZ? “Yes”, of course.

That long time residents of a country who become alarmed at a growing influx of foreigners who do not share their cultural values are described as suffering from a mental illness (and this description is considered “appropriate”) is a stark demonstration of just how damaging political correctness is to the concept of freedom of expression.

So between 94% and 96% of sales are to people residing in NZ or intending to reside here. How disgraceful that some politicians have tried to blame house prices on the 4%.

Lies, damned lies and statistics. Shouldn’t you, of all people, be able to interpret high-grade bullshit like Tony Alexander’s? I realise the man is an expensive propagandist for an organisation that profits from increasing prices and is therefore very good at his job, but surely someone who does what you do for a living should be able to spot the scam.

In this case, Tony provides us with a figure that’s a national average. He does that because it will be usefully low – after all, foreign investors aren’t rushing to snap up investment properties in Palmerston North, Wainuiomata or Invercargill. Having achieved a nice low figure, he can lower it even further by factoring in meaningless bullshit about whether the purchasers are planning to live here or not. Et voila, a paltry 4% of purchases to foreign investors!

However, what people are actually interested in is what foreign purchasers are doing to Auckland house prices. There, the figure is above 10%, and anyone who thinks that has no effect on prices has shit for brains.

The latest BNZ and Real Estate Institute residential market survey found 9 per cent of house sales were to people offshore.

Without knowing the methodologies of the survey it’s pretty hard to take anything from it. If your aim was to show that a low percentage of foreigners/recent-immigrants were purchasing NZ property a great way to do this would be to send them a survey in a language they are not fluent in.

@Psycho Milt – and here we go Milt. On one hand, we have Tony Alexander, a respected economist who has statistics and figures at his disposal that are fact. On the other hand we have you Milt. You with your just saying stuff and trying to pass it off as fact. “Auckland house prices. There, the figure is above 10%”. Of course it is Milt, because you say it is. Sort of like your leader, Shearer said there was a video of Key speaking to the Government Security people, sort of like your leader saying he can build affordable housing in Auckland.

“1.2% of sales in Auckland are to Chinese people not intending to live here.” I think that spells it out for you Milt. Game set and match to Alexander. Who is spouting propaganda here?

And once again in this country we have silly people (Red Russell) demanding that certain things be banned because it’s “unaffordable” for Keewees.

The obvious answer is to make people wealthier so we can compete with these “bloody Asians”. By demanding bans on foreign purchases, Red Russell is accepting we cannot compete. Well, under his economic “stewardship” we wouldn’t be able to. He wants purchasing power to reduce, and to make things more expensive through printing money. Then he wants bans on foreigners owning things that will be unaffordable under his “plan”.

PTM
Thanks for the compliment but I have to disagree with you. The pen is always mightier than the sword. Perhaps I am showing my age. Calling people names and labeling groups of people is school yard stuff. It is lazy and has no place in a proper debate. I have very little experience at debating..Many older people are highly skilled at debating because it was encouraged in their schools and they entered regular competitions. It is a fine art in itself.
One concept I have learned on here is straight off the paddock , ”Play the ball not the man.” Labeling groups of people is playing the team not the ball. As I said , it is lazy, casual and convenient. No prize winning cups for people who do this.

No, the one acting like a typical totalitarian leftist is you, with your need to demonise and or delegitimise anyone who challenges your pathetic progressive political/ social perspectives. Straight from the Joe Stalin handbook on suppression of dissent.

There are rational arguments against European culture being used as a doormat by every other culture.

If you don’t want to hear them, then its better to just put your fingers in your ears rather than smear those articulating those ideas.